Driver loses dispute after reversing cars collide

A driver who collided with another vehicle as she was reversing out of her driveway will not be compensated after a dispute ruling found she was not able to establish fault for the accident.

The complainant, whose car was not covered by comprehensive insurance, alleged that the driver of the other vehicle had been driving too fast and was responsible for the accident. She sought for the insured driver to be held liable for the damage to her car.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) said CCTV footage showed both drivers waiting for a large truck to pass before attempting to reverse out of their driveway.

It observed that both drivers did not seem to be aware of each other prior to the incident, saying that they “both failed to keep a proper lookout”.

The complainant said that the insured driver “came out of the driveway at excessive speed,” and reversed “for a greater distance than is reasonable”. She attributed the driver’s actions to her inexperience.

AFCA rejected the complainant’s argument, saying that the supplied footage did not show the driver to be speeding.

“I am not satisfied the CCTV establishes that the insured driver was speeding. No other evidence has been provided to show the insured driver was speeding,” AFCA said.

“Both drivers were lawfully reversing out of their driveways (apart from their failure to keep a proper lookout) and I do not consider the fact that the insured driver moved further across the road puts her at fault for the collision.”

“I do not consider it relevant of itself that the insured driver was inexperienced. There is no suggestion that she did not hold a valid licence at the time of the collision.”

The ruling determined that the complainant failed to show that the insured driver caused the collision and did not require QBE to pay for her repair costs.

It also rejected allegations from the complainant that the insurer’s handling of the claim caused her to sustain financial losses from not having a vehicle.

“The insurer had determined the claim and dealt with the complainant’s internal complaint by November 29 2022, which was less than three months after the accident which occurred on September 5, 2022,” AFCA said.

“I do not believe the insurer otherwise acted in a manner that caused the complainant to suffer an unusual degree or extent of inconvenience outside of that expected for an insurance claim or pursuing a complaint.”

Click here for the ruling.